Improving the assessment of malnutrition in cancer: Using systemic inflammation markers as a supplement to the inflammation items of the GLIM criteria

Background & aims Systemic inflammation is a key pathogenic criterion for diagnosing malnutrition using the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Although cancer is commonly considered as a chronic inflammation-related disease, the inflammatory burden may vary depending on the type and stage of cancer. Therefore, a more precise definition of inflammation criteria could facilitate the identification of malnutrition in cancer. Methods This prospective multicenter study included 1683 cancer patients screened via NRS2002 for malnutrition risk. The inflammatory burden index (IBI), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and albumin (ALB) level were used to assess the inflammatory burden. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between the GLIM criteria and overall survival. Harrell's concordance index (C-index) was used to compare the discriminative performance of the original, IBI-based, CRP-based, NLR-based, and ALB-based GLIM criteria for survival. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between GLIM criteria and short-term outcomes, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs. Results Compared to the original GLIM criteria, the IBI/CRP/NLR/ALB-based GLIM criteria better predicted the long-term outcomes of patients with cancer (chi-square: 1.316 vs. 78.321 vs. 74.740 vs. 88.719 vs. 100.921). The C-index revealed that the inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria showed significantly better prognostic accuracy than the original GLIM criteria. The ALB-based GLIM criteria exhibited the best prognostic accuracy. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria were independent predictive factors for the long-term prognosis of cancer. Patients with malnutrition had a 45% higher risk of adverse long-term prognoses than those without malnutrition. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria had good prognostic ability to predict outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months. The stepwise effect of the grading of severity via the IBI-based GLIM criteria and CRP-based GLIM criteria was notable. The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria are useful for predicting short-term outcomes, length of hospitalization, and hospitalization costs. Conclusion The inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria have a stronger predictive value than the original GLIM criteria in evaluating both the short- and long-term prognoses of cancer patients. It is recommended to use the inflammation marker-based GLIM criteria for nutritional evaluation of cancer patients.